The task force formed in Pacific Palisades to work with the Department of Water and Power to find a location for a new distribution station (DS 104) has not held an organized meeting since Feb. 6, and it's unclear when they will meet again.
Results from the comment cards collected at a well-attended Jan. 15 community forum at Palisades Charter High School gauging residents on the top four site recommendations for DS 104 have not been released.
A public hearing on Jan. 24 brought some new faces into the discussion of the final four distribution station sites, including an attorney representing several property owners in Paseo Miramar.
"The DS 104 substation remains an important project for ensuring electrical reliability in the Pacific Palisades," said LADWP spokesperson Carol Tucker in a statement to Patch on Wednesday, March 20. "LADWP is currently reviewing the potential sites, schedules and other important issues to determine the next steps in this process. Once we have solidified the next steps we plan to share them with the Palisades community."
Tucker added they expect to have a summary of the public comments posted on the LADWP website "in a week or so."
Pacific Palisades Community Council members speculated about the delays and lack of transparency at its Thursday, March 14 meeting, discrediting the entire procedure by the task force, LADWP and Council District 11.
Some council members said they felt tricked by the process, vulnerable to volunteering for city organizations and should withdraw support for the task force.
"We're left out in left field," said Stuart Muller, Area 6 representative. "I'm getting tired of asking the same questions to the same people."
Some members defended the volunteer efforts by task force members (several of which were present at the meeting as community council members).
Area 3 representative Jim Rea said the task force is not proceeding without word from LADWP.
"We agreed amongst ourselves to not speak about it," Rea said. "Clearly there’s an issue on the table. Clearly we’re not interested in talking about it. We're not sure the outcome on it. We're awaiting for them to respond."
Rea added that "two to three" outcomes will arise. First, the task force will pick up its work and continue process in narrowing the search for the DS 104 site.
"We’re considering if any sites need to be changed," he said.
Second, some task force members may find that there has not been an acceptable response by LADWP, and some may choose to leave.
Third, Rea said there may be an outcome where the task force is "no longer a viable entity going forward" and will disband.
Other task force members of the community council did not reveal new information at the meeting.
"Has this process failed?" asked Richard Cohen, former community councilman, about the transparency. "We can say that. I think the reason LADWP isn't doing it is because they have good reason."
All information about the DS 104 Task Force meetings has been provided by LADWP, with the last information posted from Jan. 9: https://www.ladwp.com/ladwp/faces/ladwp/aboutus/a-power/a-p-projects/a-p-p-distributingstation?_adf.ctrl-state=q9xubl58x_4&_afrLoop=144340031697000